Football's regional confederations have voiced strong criticism of FIFA’s proposal to sell stakes in a $20 billion commercial subsidiary, stating they were blindsided by the plan to introduce private investors into the sport. The Confederations of North, Central America and the Caribbean (CONCACAF) and Asia (AFC) expressed significant dismay, having learned of the equity sale proposal through media reports rather than official channels.
FIFA's Commercial Subsidiary Proposal
FIFA announced on Tuesday its intention to establish a subsidiary valued at $20 billion, which would manage commercial and event operations for the World Cup and other tournaments. This new entity, named Forward Enterprise, is designed to oversee commercial and event operations, with FIFA proposing to offer up to 20% of its equity to external investors.
The objective of this initiative is to raise up to $4.2 billion. FIFA, which recently concluded its 48-team World Cup across the US, Canada, and Mexico, would retain control of the enterprise while seeking minority stakes from private investors.
Confederations Express Lack of Consultation
CONCACAF stated it was only made aware of the matter through media reports and subsequent press releases, highlighting a "deep concern by the lack of due process." The confederation conveyed shared disappointment over the level of detail being made public before any discussions with relevant governance bodies and stakeholders had occurred.
"As leaders within football, we are the custodians of the game," CONCACAF asserted in a statement. "Collectively, FIFA, the confederations and every member association have a responsibility to always act in the best interests of the sport. Every decision we make must be guided by good governance, robust processes and long-term stewardship."
Asian Football Confederation's Disappointment
The Asian Football Confederation (AFC) acknowledged the importance of "exploring innovative approaches" but expressed disappointment that such a significant proposal was announced without prior opportunity for the confederation to review the plan. The AFC emphasised that such initiatives ought to be founded upon principles of good governance, transparency, and meaningful consultation.
The confederation added that decisions potentially reshaping the commercial and financial future of the game necessitate comprehensive prior engagement with confederations, member associations, and other relevant stakeholders before any proposal is presented to appropriate decision-making bodies. The AFC firmly believes all stakeholders should receive sufficient information and adequate time to assess the proposal’s governance, legal, commercial, and strategic implications fully.
Wider Backlash and Concerns
The criticism is not confined to CONCACAF and the AFC. Reports indicate that individual national football federations have also expressed a lack of prior notification. Philippe Diallo, president of the French Football Federation, stated that his organisation had not been informed and that the direction of the proposal, specifically the introduction of investment funds into a commercial entity alongside FIFA, raised numerous questions.
England's Football Association (FA) similarly declared it was "completely unaware" of the proposal and lacked substantive details. The FA expressed deep concern about the apparent lack of process and governance and the substance and principles involved, promising to make its views clear once the proposal is shared transparently.
UEFA has accused FIFA of putting the game’s "soul" up for sale and is reportedly organising an emergency meeting with its 55 member associations to discuss the proposal and formulate a course of action, with a potential boycott of FIFA competitions understood to be among the possible responses being considered.
The European Union's Sport Commissioner, Glenn Micallef, also raised concerns about FIFA's regulatory powers potentially becoming aligned with the financial interests of private entities, noting that when investment values depend on FIFA's decisions, it raises profound questions about governance, independence, and conflicts of interest.
